Should Parents Reward Children for High Test Scores?

A review that pooled 128 experiments examined rewards and people’s willingness to continue an activity freely. Expected rewards, tangible prizes, and rewards tied to performance generally reduced that willingness. Tangible rewards also reduced people’s reported interest^[1].

The same review found that tangible rewards tended to be more harmful to children’s interest than to college students’ interest^[1]. This matters because a promised toy or payment is a tangible reward.

One experiment gives a child-sized picture of the concern. Preschool children tried a new activity. Some expected the chance to play with attractive toys as a reward. Two weeks later, those children showed less interest than children who had not expected a reward^[2].

The activity was not a school test. The children were also younger than much of this post’s audience. Still, the experiment directly tested young children and an expected toy reward^[2].

The problem is not that prizes are always harmful. The concern is the bargain announced beforehand. It can make the prize the main reason for doing the task.

Large school experiments also tested whether money improved student achievement. They covered more than 200 urban schools across three cities. Students received money for reading books, assessment results, or classroom grades^[3].

These experiments do not prove that no child will ever work harder for money. They do show that school incentives can fail even when the reward is clear and valuable^[3]. A parent should not assume that a promised payment will produce a higher score.

A broader review combined 183 studies involving 212,468 people across school, work, and physical activities. Interest in the activity went with better performance, whether incentives were present or not^[4]. Interest was especially important for the quality of performance^[4].

That review included much more than elementary education. Its findings cannot be treated as a precise answer for one child’s test. It does support protecting a student’s reasons for learning, rather than making every result a transaction.

The review of 128 experiments found a different pattern for positive feedback. Positive feedback increased reported interest and people’s choice to continue the activity^[1]. The benefit was smaller for children than for college students, but the overall direction was positive^[1].

Positive feedback does not mean calling every result amazing. It means giving information that helps the child see what worked.

After the test, you might say:

• “You started preparing without being reminded.”
• “You stayed with the parts that felt difficult.”
• “Your teacher’s comment gives us something useful to work on.”
• “Let’s choose one change for next time.”

These lines are practical examples, not scripts tested in the studies. Their purpose is to keep the conversation about actions and next steps.

Avoid making praise depend on being the best. A child who misses the target still needs useful information. Otherwise, the promised reward can become a second disappointment added to the score.

On the night before the test, remove the bargain. Tell your child that no toy or payment depends on tomorrow’s score.

Then choose one short preparation period. Put phones away. Ask the child to name what feels secure and what still feels uncertain. End at the planned time rather than stretching the evening into a tense marathon.

Before bed, pack what is needed for school. Keep the morning routine ordinary. These are practical choices, not findings tested by the reward studies.

After the test, wait until you have something useful to discuss. Ask what felt manageable and what felt difficult. When the result arrives, look at the teacher’s feedback before discussing rewards or consequences.

Learn4Less sessions often use this same pattern: choose one controllable action, then review it after the test.

1. Cancel the score bargain. Do not promise money, toys, or screen time for reaching one score. Expected tangible rewards can reduce later interest, and school payments have not reliably improved achievement^[1][3].

2. Name a controllable action. Choose something the child can complete tonight. Keep the target about preparation, not tomorrow’s result. This is practical judgment based on separating actions from outcomes.

3. Give information instead of a label. Point out one useful choice the child made. Positive feedback supported interest and continued participation in the large review^[1].

4. Keep affection separate from performance. A low score should not cost the child warmth, attention, or family time. Say plainly that the test provides information; it does not set the child’s value.

5. Celebrate without creating a contract. You can still enjoy a favourite meal or mark the end of a demanding week. Keep that family moment separate from a required score.

The distinction is simple. “Reach this score and get this prize” is a contract. “You worked through a difficult week, and we are glad to spend time together” is a relationship.

The child experiments here do not all point in one direction. Rewards unrelated to performance reduced interest after children were told they had done well^[5].

Another experiment found that rewards tied to the quality of children’s performance increased their interest during a later five-minute choice period. They did better than rewards given merely for completing the activity and better than no reward^[6].

Those findings warn against saying that every reward always destroys motivation.

None of the studies here tested the exact family situation in the opening: a night-before promise followed by an actual elementary-school test. The large school experiments covered urban schools, and their abstract does not give the students’ ages^[3]. Two child experiments measured interest during free-choice periods, not achievement across a school term^[5][6].

Tonight, replace the prize offer with one sentence: “Your score will tell us what to work on next. It will not decide whether you get my support.”

When the result comes home, discuss one thing that helped and one change for next time. That gives the child a target they can act on. It also keeps a single score from becoming a price tag.